Do you BELIEVE that someone making 100k a year needs to pay at least 50k in taxes?

[callipygoustp]

Quite the interesting request, seeing as how you cannot possibly know what my breathing is like.

Metaphorical suggestion based on what was bolded.

It was merely an opinion, no need to fret.

Ironic, considering the language in your original post. Take your own advice in the future.

[TITAN308]

ITT a bunch of people with no money are somehow brilliant masterminds on how much money people need.

Which is a loaded problem anyhow as 'need' varies from person to person.

We turn this debate about people on welfare buying steak and lobster and all of a sudden "need" is a vile repugnant word and use unfairly.

This is just another not so cleverly masked "I hate people with more money than me" rant in most of these postings.

People earn what people are willing to pay them. People are just salty as fuck.

[Queen of Hamsters]

Metaphorical suggestion based on what was bolded.

Ironic, considering the language in your original post. Take your own advice in the future.

My opinion is that it's fucking arrogant to dismiss that sum of money as "not being a lot" considering the reality of mankind's wealth distribution. Can't take any "advice" which would change that, really.

[Surfd]

Do you realize that if you cut corporate and small business tax rates, they can reinvest that money in the economy thus creating more jobs and increasing income across the board? Thus, more taxes are paid. This is a blatantly obvious side effect of lowering taxes. More taxes will be paid because more money will be paid out to people in the form of jobs.

Ahh yes. That wonderful delusion. Sure, they can. Truth of the matter however is that they never do. Lower the taxes on them and they will simply have their offshore bank account cake, and eat their lowered taxes at home cake too, while simply pocketing even more money thanks to the tax breaks.

[Karfal]

For the flat tax to properly function you'd have to close a significant amount of tax loopholes that exist. You can't tell everyone to pay 20% while the super wealthy and corporations have exploitable loopholes that drop that 20% closer to 7.

The odds of our lawmakers passing that is slim to none. They'll propose flat tax and heavy cuts on the rich but won't touch the tax loopholes.

edit: Even then, the flat tax would take far more work and restructure. That's just the start.

That's the point of a flat tax. And even trumps plan touches on some of the loopholes.

But the point of a flat tax is not need the IRS or tax accountants.

Every 1 dollar you earn 15 cents goes to the government. No tax right off, no marriage tax breaks, no child tax breaks for the welfare mother with 5 kids with 5 men. Flat 15%.

[kaelix1]

100k dollars, not a lot? meh, that is depressing consider here in my country I make that sum in 20 years, hmm i wonder is it's not to late to start over at 30 )

[TITAN308]

100k dollars, not a lot? meh, that is depressing consider here in my country I make that sum in 20 years, hmm i wonder is it's not to late to start over at 30 )

Money isn't everything to everyone. I left a corporate world that was good pay and loaded to the brim with benefits to pursue a career in civil service. Needless to say it is a hefty pay cut in salary.

With that said, people being salty about what people make are still a bunch of crotchy babies who just need to get over it and worry about themselves. If I was a betting man literally no one here complaining would suddenly turn their nose up at 250k salary nor would they "spend every penny" they earned while getting it.

They are all liars.

[Cæli]

No one has any right to the income earned by someone else. It doesn't matter how much that person earns, $10,000 a year, $100,000 a year or $10,000,000 a year. What that person earns belongs to them and no one else. The government doesn't have a right to it, a slacker sitting on their couch every day doesn't have a right to it, a welfare queen doesn't have a right to it, NO ONE has any right to it.

Taxes need to be slashed into oblivion, and yes the country can support it because their a million welfare and BS "entitlement" programs that should not exist that waste trillions of dollars. Taxes exist to pay for the military and infrastructure, that's it. All other government spending needs to be eliminated. If at any time you feel you are entitled to the money earned by someone else, as in you feel that rich people need to be paying more in taxes, you are free to move to a socialist hellhole like Venezuela at any time. But that is not how the US works, it's not how it's ever supposed to work. Democrats have been pissing away everyone else's money for far too long. Plenty of RHINO Republicans are guilty of it too.

The top 1% of income earners pay over 90% of all income taxes collected, yet liberals keep claiming they aren't "paying their fair share". In reality they're paying their share and the share of 8 other people. Meanwhile 50% of income earners not only pay ZERO income tax, they receive a payout from the government every year from things like child tax credits. Every penny they pay in federal income tax on their checks gets refunded and they get an extra few thousand dollars for having kids they pump out like their ATMs.

imo what matters is contribution, the level of contribution
the more you contribute, the more benefit you should get
and you can make a same ratio for everyone, contribute 1, get 1
contribute 100k, get 100k
(btw some persons today are contributing 100k and getting 100000k which is not normal)

at the exception that the poorest person on earth doesn't die of poverty
that rule is not true yet
we are certainly evolving toward that
given that it's not the reality yet, do you think the wealthy giving less than nowadays would help society ?
not talking about useless lazy persons in modern societies, contribute 0 get 0 (but the state won't let them die, which is sane overall because well that would be rather hardcore to see)

[shrunken]

lolllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll

title is the freshest of baits.

[Infracted]

[callipygoustp]

My opinion is that it's fucking arrogant to dismiss that sum of money as "not being a lot" considering the reality of mankind's wealth distribution. Can't take any "advice" which would change that, really.

Per several of the posts that responded to me, its, as I expected, relative. Where I live, and even for various family/friends around the states, 100k would be difficult to live on. As I stated in my first post, I was not intending to be flippant. I was, genuinely, curious to see what people would have to say.

[schwarzkopf]

Which is a loaded problem anyhow as 'need' varies from person to person.

What people need is pretty much the same person to person, people don't NEED money - however what people need COSTS money.

It is that cost which varies from person to person.

If one doesn't wish, as a society, to furnish people with what they need - then as a society you have to allow people do suicide if they can't finance their needs.

Society needs to choose - social security, or legalise suicide ... that's it.

[I Push Buttons]

Money isn't everything to everyone. I left a corporate world that was good pay and loaded to the brim with benefits to pursue a career in civil service. Needless to say it is a hefty pay cut in salary.

With that said, people being salty about what people make are still a bunch of crotchy babies who just need to get over it and worry about themselves.

Who is salty, other than yourself?

You and that other guy are the ones in here acting blasé about making more money than 99% of people will ever make (or so you both claim) and then getting salty yourself about catching people with your blatant bait post when they are put off by your arrogance.

[JohnBrown1917]

Sounds nice.

[Foaming Clean]

I think this is part of the problem in understanding how badly people are being screwed by the truly wealthy.

100k is enough to sound like a lot for the majority of people alive today and it has historically been a good sum of money but the reality is that 70-100k is lower middle class, when people talk about taxing the rich it should be thought of as the 500k+ crowd.

[TITAN308]

Who is salty, other than yourself?

You and that other guy are the ones in here acting blasé about making more money than 99% of people will ever make (or so you both claim) and then getting salty yourself about catching people with your blatant bait post when they are put off by your arrogance.

Ah the classic "no u" defense.

Bravo.

[I Push Buttons]

Ah the classic "no u" defense.

Bravo.

Indeed....

[Hiricine]

Like everything, people should pay approximately whatever the value is of the service they will receive, though I think you'd have trouble making the argument that someone making 100k used 50k worth of services in a year.

[Blur4stuff]

business can reinvest the money

There are many wealthy businesses and rich individuals right now. Are they using all of that extra wealth to create great paying jobs in the US?

This is what I don't get about people making this argument. Which companies are you talking about? Who do you think is going to suddenly create a bunch of jobs there's no demand for just because they get a tax break?

[UnknownShadows00]

well 100k a year is not that huge
above 250k, now it start to be unnecessary

like, what will you do of all that money anyway ? some other could benefit more from it, like if you manage to get too much money and you keep it, it WILL hurt the economy and indirectly the life of other people

Um... invest in other businesses? Use that money for personal conveniences you DESERVED?! Like why motivate yourself to make all of that money if other people are going to tax the fuck out of you for being better than 95% of all of the other lazy people at making a profit?

[WernerCD]

I wonder what is causing the deficit......

We wouldn't want to cherry pick our information... would we? You want to know what causes the deficit? How about we look at TOTAL spending:




Once you include all the promises made that we can't afford it sure does make the Military Budget look smaller... I do agree we could cut some military spending (IE: wasteful spending on a new plane that is worse than previous generations of aircraft)... but focusing on diagrams that look at the trees while ignoring the forest only shows a part of the issue.

Look at the full picture: We are 20 Trillion in debt and climbing. We collect a RECORD amount of revenue:



Yet despite more and more revenue, we fall deeper and deeper in debt.

That's not a revenue problem. That's a spending problem. Politicians making promises that they can't keep and then blaming the debt on the minority of people that pay the majority of the taxes.